Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Disjunction is often understood exclusively in natural languages. In English, the disjunctive word "or" is often understood exclusively, particularly when used with the particle "either". The English example below would normally be understood in conversation as implying that Mary is not both a singer and a poet. [4] [5] 1. Mary is a singer or a ...
In propositional logic, material implication [1] [2] is a valid rule of replacement that allows a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not- P {\displaystyle P} or Q {\displaystyle Q} and that either form can replace the other in ...
Although the type of a logical disjunction expression is Boolean in most languages (and thus can only have the value true or false), in some languages (such as Python and JavaScript), the logical disjunction operator returns one of its operands: the first operand if it evaluates to a true value, and the second operand otherwise.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate
It is the negation of material implication. That is to say that for any two propositions P {\displaystyle P} and Q {\displaystyle Q} , the material nonimplication from P {\displaystyle P} to Q {\displaystyle Q} is true if and only if the negation of the material implication from P {\displaystyle P} to Q {\displaystyle Q} is true.
The material conditional (also known as material implication) is an operation commonly used in logic. When the conditional symbol → {\displaystyle \rightarrow } is interpreted as material implication, a formula P → Q {\displaystyle P\rightarrow Q} is true unless P {\displaystyle P} is true and Q {\displaystyle Q} is false.
Here is a table with the most common notational variants for logical connectives. ... Disjunction (∨) Implication (→) ... implication as the function arrow (→ ...
The Łukasiewicz Ł3 has the same tables for AND, OR, and NOT as the Kleene logic given above, but differs in its definition of implication in that "unknown implies unknown" is true. This section follows the presentation from Malinowski's chapter of the Handbook of the History of Logic, vol 8. [20]